Lesbian couple in gay marriage case p...

Lesbian couple in gay marriage case prepares for Supreme Court decision

There are 1581 comments on the Fox News story from Mar 24, 2013, titled Lesbian couple in gay marriage case prepares for Supreme Court decision. In it, Fox News reports that:

Big change is coming to the lives of the lesbian couple at the center of the fight for same-sex marriage in California no matter how the Supreme Court decides their case.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Fox News.

Francisco dAnconia

Barre, VT

#709 Apr 9, 2013
Just Think wrote:
<quoted text>
You do understand that you aren't even addressing the issue you were called out for, right?
Shocker.
oh?

why don't you raise the issue more clearly and I will address it...

but i bet it will come down to you not even thinking about the distinction i mentioned...

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#710 Apr 9, 2013
Still waiting...

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I ask for ONE example of methodology out of scores of studies that equate lesbian parenting with biological (there are NO gay studies...), and you can't produce?
Instead, you deny the latest, largest and most scientific study to date?
Here is your problem;
Step, adoptive, foster and single parents ALL rate below biological parents. You want to claim that ss couples who can only ever be a deprived HALF of those situations is EQUAL to biological parents.
Silly stupid. At the price of a child's welfare. Which makes it obscenely depraved.
<quoted text>
I keep asking you to provide one of those studies. Whats the problem honey???
Again, what would distinguish a ss couple, who can ONLY be an adoptive, step, foster or single parent (except ALWAYS depriving the child of one gender), distinct from heterosexual default parents?
You keep asserting ss couples are the same as marriage, now they are better???
Someone's advertising stupidity, but it isn't me...
Snicker smile.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#711 Apr 9, 2013
KiMare wrote:
Still waiting...
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I ask for ONE example of methodology out of scores of studies that equate lesbian parenting with biological (there are NO gay studies...), and you can't produce?
Instead, you deny the latest, largest and most scientific study to date?
Here is your problem;
Step, adoptive, foster and single parents ALL rate below biological parents. You want to claim that ss couples who can only ever be a deprived HALF of those situations is EQUAL to biological parents.
Silly stupid. At the price of a child's welfare. Which makes it obscenely depraved.
<quoted text>
I keep asking you to provide one of those studies. Whats the problem honey???
Again, what would distinguish a ss couple, who can ONLY be an adoptive, step, foster or single parent (except ALWAYS depriving the child of one gender), distinct from heterosexual default parents?
You keep asserting ss couples are the same as marriage, now they are better???
Someone's advertising stupidity, but it isn't me...
Snicker smile.
and yet they can still be far better parents than many hetero couples...

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#712 Apr 9, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>and yet they can still be far better parents than many hetero couples...
LOL!!! What color is the kool-aid today??? LOL!!!

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#713 Apr 9, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL!!! What color is the kool-aid today??? LOL!!!
You can deny the truth all you want, but it will still be the truth. it's like when you deny saying something, then I put up the direct quote from you and you still deny it...

you cult mentality people are good at denying the truth...

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#714 Apr 9, 2013
wooddick57 wrote:
<quoted text>and yet they can still be far better parents than many hetero couples...
The claim is that they ARE better parents!

Explain how a valid study determined that.

Smile.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#715 Apr 9, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
The claim is that they ARE better parents!
Explain how a valid study determined that.
Smile.
Whos claim says who is a better parent?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#716 Apr 9, 2013
wooddick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Whos claim says who is a better parent?
The studies 'validated' by your 'professional' organizations.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#717 Apr 10, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
The studies 'validated' by your 'professional' organizations.
...and published by an independent scientific journal...
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#718 Apr 10, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
If they were all in on it together, 30 million scientists must be in on it then....
Experts
Elsevier serves over 30 million scientists, students and health information professionals. By delivering world-class information and innovative workflow tools to researchers, students, educators and practitioners worldwide, we help increase productivity and effectiveness.
Within Elsevier, there are many individuals offering a wide range of insights into diverse facets of STM publishing.
Don't be stupid. 30 million people didn't peer-review that Regnerus crap. His buddies from NOM did.... and they LIED about it.
Francisco dAnconia

Barre, VT

#719 Apr 10, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't be stupid. 30 million people didn't peer-review that Regnerus crap. His buddies from NOM did.... and they LIED about it.
so you object that you don't like the peers that reviewed it?

all you have to say really boils down to "I don't agree with the study"...
funny you don't accept that as to the studies on which you would rely...

so will you dodge today by claiming I am a bad lawyer, or that I am not one?
what job did you have at GE dude?
BTW, no one believes 6 people like your posts...

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#720 Apr 10, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't be stupid. 30 million people didn't peer-review that Regnerus crap. His buddies from NOM did.... and they LIED about it.
We've already given you at least 18 scociologists (that have nothing to do with NOM) that also agree with the medthodology and the results....when will you quit this lying crusade...NOM is 'not' a scientific agency, and did NOT publish this study in a scientific journal read and trusted by over 30 million scientists....

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#721 Apr 10, 2013
Francisco dAnconia wrote:
BTW, no one believes 6 people like your posts...
That is a 'typical' Mona stunt..
Francisco dAnconia

Barre, VT

#722 Apr 10, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
That is a 'typical' Mona stunt..
I know, I just like to make him do the "who me?" routine every once in a while...
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#723 Apr 10, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
We've already given you at least 18 scociologists (that have nothing to do with NOM) that also agree with the medthodology and the results....when will you quit this lying crusade...NOM is 'not' a scientific agency, and did NOT publish this study in a scientific journal read and trusted by over 30 million scientists....
Oh puh-leez. It's a second-rate journal at best...

NOM paid for the study, dipshit. It's obvious they aren't scientists because everything they say is a lie. So they hired Regnerus to front for them.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#724 Apr 10, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
We've already given you at least 18 scociologists (that have nothing to do with NOM) that also agree with the medthodology and the results....when will you quit this lying crusade...NOM is 'not' a scientific agency, and did NOT publish this study in a scientific journal read and trusted by over 30 million scientists....
And I'll raise you 200 Sociologists and other researchers who have serious issues with both the study and questionable peer review process it underwent:

http://familyinequality.wordpress.com/2012/06...

It was actually approved and published by Social Science Research, a journal in the massive Elsevier family of scientific journals (2700+), it on its own has nowhere near 30 million readers, trusting or not.

Do you wanna know what the American Sociological Association really thinks about the Regnerus study? Here's a link to their amicus brief filed in the Perry and Windsor cases, they devote an entire chapter to how bad it is.

http://www.asanet.org/documents/ASA/pdfs/12-1...

Did you know that his paper was written and submitted to Social Science Research for review nearly a month BEFORE he had even received the data? Did you know that once he did actually have the data to analyze, it took all of five days to have the completed version of his study back under final review? Did you know that the entire length of time that it took for his study to go from conclusions submitted without statistical support to peer reviewed science was all of six weeks?

How's it feel to be a useful idiot?
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#726 Apr 10, 2013
Francisco dAnconia wrote:
<quoted text>
so you object that you don't like the peers that reviewed it?
all you have to say really boils down to "I don't agree with the study"...
funny you don't accept that as to the studies on which you would rely...
so will you dodge today by claiming I am a bad lawyer, or that I am not one?
what job did you have at GE dude?
BTW, no one believes 6 people like your posts...
The "peers" LIED about their conflict of interest, silly shyster.

http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/4-regner...

Regnerus Scandal Ripped Wide Open As UT Confesses To Major, Systemic Ethics Failures
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#727 Apr 10, 2013
Francisco dAnconia wrote:
<quoted text>
I know, I just like to make him do the "who me?" routine every once in a while...
"make me"?????

hahahahahaha
ahahahahahahahaha
ahahahahahahaha

You're such a sociopath.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#728 Apr 10, 2013
Francisco dAnconia wrote:
<quoted text>
so you object that you don't like the peers that reviewed it?
all you have to say really boils down to "I don't agree with the study"...
funny you don't accept that as to the studies on which you would rely...
I don't agree with his methodology. It makes his conclusions bogus.
"studies on which I would rely" is speculative comment at best. You have no idea on what I rely. Like everything else you do, it's just another self-serving lie to try and change the subject. Besides, we're not talking about 'those' studies. We're talking about Regnerus.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#729 Apr 10, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh puh-leez. It's a second-rate journal at best...
NOM paid for the study, dipshit. It's obvious they aren't scientists because everything they say is a lie. So they hired Regnerus to front for them.
He's aready been cleared of that lie....and the journal is not 'second rate'...it's actually very well known and respected...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Family Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Child care choices limited for those working ou... Tue CodeTalker 13
News 2 Vt. men face sex crimes involving teens (Nov '10) Tue Sosick 5
News Talking to Your Children about Transgender Tue TerriB1 1
News Three Children Among 25 Undocumented Immigrants... Tue josh 12
News Deportation tears apart family of 9 Mon Erich 1
News Our recommendation: Springboro voters should sa... (Feb '08) Mon Boro parent 32,019
News Joe Guzzardi: DACA Mires Donald Trump in Swamp,... Sun Wildchild 3
More from around the web